Earth-Shaking Verbalizations...

     

     Superior Intellectuals Verbalizing ... If one is unable to explain a supernatural being (or what is commonly referred to as God) & to provide demonstrable scientific evidence that such an entity exists it is not a logical given the unproven entity does not exist. 
The level of technological development and scientific facilities available at the period one is presently at, may not present one with the skills or tools to make such evidence demonstrable, quantifiable or tangible. 
The absence of scientific evidence alone does not confirm  the non-existence of the entity. 
Besides the sophistication & or incomprehensibility of the nature of the Entity (god) by human intellectual faculties/abilities may make that proof impossibly unobtainable.
Socratic logic plus a highly developed ability of analytical thinking & the gift to perform impressive Platonic  mental acrobatics may imbue some with a heightened sense of intellectual superiority.  Coupled with a verbosity and fluency in semantics may embellish one with a self perceived aura of extreme intelligence and knowledgeability but in the final analysis based on the universal common denominator of goodness, humility and charity one stand on a slippery slope of self arrogance mutually boosted and reinforced by fellow pseudo intellectuals.
By denying and ridiculing the idea of a supernatural being most call God, one might feel that one is greater perhaps than God himself. It is usually an insecure, childish attempt at self glorification,  by destroying or denigrating a commonly regarded icon of greatness.
If one claims that inflicting a non factual premise on others is immoral what  then is so moral about inflicting the opposite stance of not subscribing to the former non factual premise ?
A hypothetical situation :
An Atheist when in an utterly hopeless & desperate situation, eg. when an only child/loved one is dying of an incurable terminal illness, finds no help from every human facilities/faculties and intelligent HUMAN medical resources; 
would call on  : 
° dead relatives vis father or mother presumably endowed with supernatural powers ?
°Albert Einstein ?
°Richard Dawkins ? 
°Stefan Molyneux ?
°President of department of Philosophy at Ivy League University ?
°The Professor of Philosophy at their Alma Mater ? 
°Their great thinker colleagues ?
°Obi Wan Kenobi ?
°The President of the Socratic Society of Rational Analytical Thinking
°Their own EGO ?- 
for help ?
Or would he deep down wished then that there is a GOD?

Using words like 'inflicting' a belief based on faulty premises & accusation of planting a 'viral infection' in the mind of a person is analogous to a small boy gleefully running down an idea much greater than himself to boost his own self esteem.

If there is a God ('If' … since He cannot be, [actually need not be] proven) He would feel sad & sorry for the insecurity of the Atheist/philosopher.